RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training. - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
En-tête de profil de groupe est temporairement indisponible.
RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.
Simon Pickstone, modifié il y a 9 années.
Spending CIL on Skills and Training.
Advocate Publications: 104 Date d'inscription: 22/04/13 Publications Récentes
0
Does anybody have a view as to whether or not one would be on 'shaky ground' by placing 'employment and skills-type training' on the R123 List and seeking to fund it through CIL receipts? How tenuous is the argument that 'human resources' are a type of infrastructure? Thought/views are welcomed!
Richard Holmes, modifié il y a 9 années.
RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.
New Member Publications: 13 Date d'inscription: 20/10/11 Publications Récentes
0
My view is that it isn't infrastructure so we have excluded it from CIL and would look to deliver through policy and conditions or S.106.
Simon Pickstone, modifié il y a 9 années.
RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.
Advocate Publications: 104 Date d'inscription: 22/04/13 Publications Récentes
0
Thanks for your comments everybody :) Why not S106?...well...there is the ambition to minimise it's use...accepting it won't be scrapped alltogether which would make sense since it is forcing us to run two parallel processes for securing developer contributions...and then there is the faf of complying with the 'Pooling Restrictions' (whatever they actually mean!?).
Richard Holmes, modifié il y a 9 années.
RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.
New Member Publications: 13 Date d'inscription: 20/10/11 Publications Récentes
0
If it's not infrastructure then it's not subject to the pooling restrictions? In any case, if it meets the three tests there would be no need to pool because the training would only be related to the development and meeting the requirements of just the development itself, so you wouldn't be pooling anything.
Hi Simon, If training is not "infrastructure" then its not caught by the pooling restrictions.Simon Pickstone:Thanks for your comments everybody :) Why not S106?...well...there is the ambition to minimise it's use...accepting it won't be scrapped alltogether which would make sense since it is forcing us to run two parallel processes for securing developer contributions...and then there is the faf of complying with the 'Pooling Restrictions' (whatever they actually mean!?).
Simon Pickstone, modifié il y a 9 années.
RE: Spending CIL on Skills and Training.
Advocate Publications: 104 Date d'inscription: 22/04/13 Publications Récentes
0